EPO president: UK’s UPC withdrawal 'not a decisive blow'

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

EPO president: UK’s UPC withdrawal 'not a decisive blow'

 Antonio Campinos

Antonio Campinos said it was a “great pity” that the UK would no longer be part of the UPC but that the system would remain attractive

EPO president Antonio Campinos has conceded that the proposed unitary patent may appear less attractive without the UK, but has insisted that with the political will to make it happen the project can still be a success.

Describing the UK government’s decision to no longer seek membership of the unitary patent and the Unified Patent Court (UPC) as a “great pity”, Campinos said: “Some will say the decision is a blow to the whole system, but is it a decisive blow? No.”

He added: “Yes, no longer having the UK as a member may make it less attractive but it still has huge benefits to offer, especially when you consider the economic benefits and the potential reach. Whether it has 25, 22 or 20 member states, the UPC makes sense.”

Campinos was speaking at Managing IP’s International Patent Forum in London today.

The UK government’s admission last week that it no longer wanted to be a part of the UPC could be a major blow to the proposed system. A spokesperson for the prime minister’s office said that joining a system that has oversight from the Court of Justice of the EU was “inconsistent” with its aim of being a “self-governing nation.”

A pending complaint in Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court could yet throw more doubt over the project. A judgment is expected in that case in the next month or so.

Legally there is also doubt over the UPC’s future as the UK, France and Germany are all required to ratify the project before it can come into force.

Campinos added that although people could now find ways not to pursue the UPC, with the right political will and support there are also “1,000 reasons” why it should continue.

Campinos, who took over as EPO president from Benoît Battistelli in 2018, also spoke of the importance of harnessing artificial intelligence (AI) in the EPO’s everyday work.

Despite the EPO decision to reject a patent application listing AI as an inventor, Campinos predicted that this is a subject that will come under much discussion in the coming years.  

“We can expect to see more of these applications,” he said, adding: “These are challenges we are going to have to face.”

AI will also be used to assist EPO staff in their everyday work, Campinos suggested, adding that AI assistance will be used by examiners as part of the office’s commitment to quality.  



more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The new outfit, Ashurst Perkins Coie, will bring together around 3,000 lawyers across 23 countries
In the seventh episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Out, a network for LGBTQAI+ professionals and their allies
Sara Horton, co-chair of Willkie’s IP litigation group, reflects on launching the firm’s Chicago office during a global pandemic, and how she advises young, female attorneys
Brian Paul Gearing brings technical depth, litigation expertise, and experience with Japanese business culture to Pillsbury’s IP practice
News of InterDigital suing Amazon in the US and CMS IndusLaw challenging Indian rules on foreign firms were also among the top talking points
IP lawyers at three firms reflect on how courts across Australia have reacted to AI use in litigation, and explain why they support measured use of the technology
AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Inès Garlantezec, who became principal of the firm’s Luxembourg office earlier this year, discusses what's been keeping her busy, including settling a long-running case
Gift this article